Search Article 
  
 Advanced search 
  
 
About us - Editorial board - Browse articles - Submit article - Instructions - Subscribe - Advertise - Contacts - Login 
  Users Online: 284 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size   



 
Browse articles
REVIEW ARTICLE
J Clin Imaging Sci 2011,  1:48

Breast MR Imaging: What the Radiologist Needs to Know


1 Department of Imaging Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA
2 Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine, Erie, PA, USA
3 Department of Imaging Sciences, University of Rochester Medical Center; Elizabeth Wende Breast Care, Rochester, NY, USA

Date of Submission09-Jan-2011
Date of Acceptance30-Aug-2011
Date of Web Publication03-Oct-2011

Correspondence Address:
Gurpreet S Dhillon
601 Elmwood Ave. Box 648, Rochester, NY 14642
USA
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2156-7514.85655

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the breast is being performed more frequently to improve primary and recurrent tumor detection, characterization, and response to therapy. Sensitivity of this test approaches 90% and the specificity ranges from 37% to 100%. We present a concise tutorial for the general radiologist with a pictorial review of common lesions identified with breast MRI.

Keywords: Benign, breast, MRI, malignant


How to cite this article:
Dhillon GS, Bell N, Ginat DT, Levit A, Destounis S, O'Connell A. Breast MR Imaging: What the Radiologist Needs to Know. J Clin Imaging Sci 2011;1:48

How to cite this URL:
Dhillon GS, Bell N, Ginat DT, Levit A, Destounis S, O'Connell A. Breast MR Imaging: What the Radiologist Needs to Know. J Clin Imaging Sci [serial online] 2011 [cited 2017 Mar 22];1:48. Available from: http://www.clinicalimagingscience.org/text.asp?2011/1/1/48/85655


   Introduction Top


Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the breast is being performed more frequently to improve primary and recurrent tumor detection, characterization, and patient's response to therapy. Sensitivity approaches 90%. [1] Specificity ranges from 37% to 100%. [1] MRI of the breast is indicated for the following: evaluation of the extent of spread of a suspected extensive high-grade carcinoma; evaluation of a suspected multifocal or bilateral neoplasm; monitoring of the response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy; screening of high-risk patients; characterization of an indeterminate lesion (after full assessment with other modalities); detection of occult breast carcinoma (in a patient with adenocarcinoma in an axillary lymph node, or in the presence of metastatic adenocarcinoma of unknown origin); detection of recurrent breast cancer after breast-conserving therapy; differentiation between scar tissue and recurrent tumor; and evaluation of implant rupture.

Contraindications to breast MRI include: contraindications to gadolinium-based contrast media due to allergy, pregnancy, or compromised renal function (eGFR < 30); inability to lie prone; marked kyphosis or kyphoscoliosis; marked obesity; extremely large breasts; implantable devices that are not MRI compatible; severe claustrophobia (which can be treated with sedatives, if necessary).

Equipment and patient positioning

The equipment necessary for the procedure include an MR device with a field strength of 1.5 Tesla or greater and a double breast surface coil [Figure 1]. The patient lies prone with both breasts lightly immobilized in the coil. Multichannel (4, 8, 16, 32) breast coils are commercially available and provide enhanced spatial and temporal resolution for improved visualization of small lesions. These coils are designed to enable breast intervention with both medial and lateral access to either breast.
Figure 1: Double breast MRI coil.

Click here to view


Imaging parameters

Image acquisition is performed in an axial plane with 2 mm (or finer) sections. Sagittal and coronal reconstructions are made from this dataset. Sagittal image acquisition is usually preferred for biopsy procedures. The primary pulse sequences are fat-suppressed axial T1-weighted (T1W) without and with contrast and fat suppressed axial T2-weighted (T2W) or short TI inversion recovery (STIR). For the contrast portion of the exam, a paramagnetic gadolinium-based intravascular contrast (0.1 mmol/kg) is injected at a rate of 2 mL/s. A minimum of two postcontrast T1-weighted series should be obtained, with initial post-contrast images within 4 min and delayed post-contrast images within 8 min after contrast administration. Kinetic curves are generated from these T1W post-contrast images. Fat suppression is used because an enhancing cancer can be confused with nonsuppressed fat as they both have high signal intensity on T1W images. The most common way to reduce or remove fat signal and show enhancement more clearly is to use spectral fat saturation. Homogeneous fat suppression may not be possible with large breasts.

Image interpretation

ACR BI-RADS® Lexicon

The American College of Radiology (ACR) has created a breast imaging and reporting data system (BI-RADS®)  Atlas More Details [2],[3] which contains terminology for describing lesion architecture and enhancement characteristics. Use of this terminology allows a comprehensive analysis of both morphological and kinetic features used in image interpretation and helps radiologists and other clinicians communicate more clearly and consistently. A radiological description should include lesion information including clock-face location and distance from nipple, morphologic assessment of enhancement, associated findings such as nipple retraction or inversion and skin changes (retraction, thickening, and invasion), and a kinetic curve assessment [Table 1].
Table 1: Useful descriptive terms for a breast MR report

Click here to view


Background enhancement

Assessment of background parenchymal enhancement pattern can be described with 4 M's: minimal, mild, moderate, and marked [Figure 2a] and [Figure 2b]. This is analogous to mammographic breast tissue density in that breasts with greater background enhancement (or greater density in mammography) may limit accuracy of underlying lesion detection. [4] Background parenchymal enhancement fluctuates with the menstrual cycle, being highest during weeks 1 and 4 and lowest during week 2. Thus, imaging between days 7-14 of the menstrual cycle is recommended, unless precluded by clinical urgency. With background enhancement in mind, one must determine if there is a lesion that is conspicuous among its surroundings.
Figure 2: (a): Minimal background enhancement.

Click here to view
Figure 2: (b): marked background enhancement.

Click here to view


Morphologic assessment of enhancement

A lesion of less than 5 mm should be described as a focus. A focus or multiple foci may result from hormonal changes (eg, fibrocystic changes) and are often stable on follow-up exams.

A 3-dimensional lesion (mass) should be characterized according to shape (round, oval, lobulated, or irregular), margins (smooth, irregular, or spiculated), and internal enhancement (homogenous, heterogeneous, rim, dark internal septations, enhancing internal septations, or central). More irregular and spiculated masses have a higher likelihood of malignancy. Specific internal enhancement patterns are often associated with certain entities: rim-enhancement is seen with high-grade invasive ductal carcinoma, cysts with inflammation, and fat necrosis; dark internal septations may be seen with fibroadenomas; enhancing internal septations are often seen with malignancy; central enhancement is seen with high-grade ductal carcinoma and vascular tumors.

If enhancement is located in an area that is not associated with a mass (nonmasslike enhancement), the description should give details of the distribution (focal, linear, ductal, segmental, regional, or diffusive), internal enhancement (homogenous, heterogeneous, clumped, stippled, punctate, reticular or dendritic), and whether it is symmetric or asymmetric. Ductal and segmental distribution of enhancement can be seen with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or invasive ductal cancer, sclerosing adenosis, atypical ductal hyperplasia, or papillary neoplasms. Diffuse enhancement is seen with benign processes and normal fibroglandular tissues. Reticular or dendritic internal enhancement is seen with lymphatic involvement such as that seen with inflammatory breast cancer.

Enhancement kinetics

Three basic curve shapes have been described [Figure 3]. [5] Type-I curves are slowly enhancing, in which gradual, steady enhancement occurs over about 5 min. Malignancy is seen in approximately 6% of lesions with a Type-I curve. [6] Type-II curves show early strong enhancement (increase over a 1-2 min period) with a subsequent plateau phase. Malignancy is seen in approximately 6-29% of lesions with a Type-II curve. [6] Type III or "washout" curves show early strong enhancement (over 1-2 min), with subsequent decline in enhancement. This produces a characteristic peak dubbed the "the cancer corner," and is strongly associated with malignancy. Malignancy is seen in approximately 29-77% of lesions with a Type-III curve. [6] Both Type-II and Type-III curves should be considered suggestive of malignancy.
Figure 3: Three types of enhancement kinetics curves seen with breast MRI.

Click here to view


Diffusion-weighted Imaging

Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) is a technique that takes into account the differences in diffusion rate of water molecules in normal and pathologic tissue. This technique, although not commonly used, has a higher specificity to differentiate between benign and malignant breast lesions compared to that of contrast-enhanced MRI (84% compared to 37%). [7] It relies on differences in cellularity to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Malignant lesions, which frequently have a higher degree of cellularity compared with benign lesions, often demonstrate restricted diffusion.

Computer-aided detection in breast MRI

Computer-aided detection (CAD) can be performed using a software adjunct package for enhancement kinetics. A maximal intensity projection (MIP), kinetics curve, and color map overlay can be generated [Figure 4]. CAD does not evaluate anatomy or pathology. Advantages of CAD include the ability to quickly analyze large numbers of images, aid in visual subtraction, and facilitate reconstructions and future comparisons.
Figure 4: (a) MIP, (b) kinetics curve, and (c) color map overlay obtained using CAD software.

Click here to view


Artifacts

Breast MRI is susceptible to artifacts common in MRI of all organ systems: ghosting, motion, wrap-around, magnetic susceptibility, signal void, field inhomogeneity, and chemical shift. Artifacts specific to breast imaging include background parenchymal enhancement (discussed above), which can be avoided by imaging between days 7-14 of the menstrual cycle, and artifact due to breast tissue (usually large breasts) abutting the radiofrequency coil, leading to signal voids and magnetic susceptibility. Poor fat saturation, which can be due to incorrect identification of the fat peak or field inhomogeneity, is often seen with breasts composed of larger amounts of fat. Care must be taken that the proper fat peak is selected, shimming is used to improve field uniformity, and appropriately sized breast coils are used to ensure adequate fat suppression.

Common benign lesions

Benign breast lesions can have a variable appearance on MRI. However, a few important principles regarding benign lesions have been described. Lesions with high signal on T1W imaging often contain fat and are thus most often benign, unless they are rapidly growing. Lesions that show intensely high signal on T2W imaging often contain water and are also generally benign. One important exception is colloid carcinoma, which also exhibits high signal on T2W images. Benign lesions often do not show enhancement. However, as described above, variable enhancement kinetics can be seen with benign lesions. Benign lesions often do not show restricted diffusion.

A simple cyst [Figure 5a], [Figure 5b], [Figure 5c], [Figure 5d] and [Figure 5e] is the most common benign breast lesion. It is best seen with ultrasound as a well circumscribed, anechoic mass, with an imperceptible wall and posterior acoustic enhancement. On MRI, simple cysts show low signal on T1W images, high signal on T2W images, and do not enhance. Mammography cannot distinguish between cyst and solid mass.
Figure 5: (a): Simple cyst. CC

Click here to view
Figure 5: (b): Simple cyst. ML views of the left breast demonstrate several well-circumscribed round/oval masses nearly isodense to the parenchyma (circles). MR images demonstrate these masses to be

Click here to view
Figure 5: (c): Simple cyst. hypointense on T1WI

Click here to view
Figure 5: (d): Simple cyst. hyperintense on T2WI

Click here to view
Figure 5: (e): Simple cyst. Nonenhancing.

Click here to view


A fibroadenoma [Figure 6] is the second-most common benign breast lesion behind the simple cyst. On MRI, it is a focus or mass of enhancement with benign morphologic characteristics (without spiculations or microlobulations), nonenhancing dark internal septations, and follows a Type-I kinetics curve.
Figure 6: Fibroadenoma. MIP image demonstrates an enhancing mass without spiculations or microlobulations.

Click here to view


An intramammary lymph node [Figure 7a], [Figure 7b] and [Figure 7c] appears as an intraparenchymal breast mass with an eccentric fatty hilum. It is often small, oval, and smoothly marginated. Though it may be located anywhere in the breast, it is more commonly located in the upper-outer quadrant. MRI characteristics include a high-signal fatty hilum on T1W images, high signal on T2W images, and rapid, intense enhancement with contrast. On mammography, an intramammary lymph node may have a reniform or lobulated mass with a fatty hilum or notch. On ultrasound, it is a hypoechoic reniform mass with an echogenic fatty hilum.
Figure 7: (a): Intramammary lymph node. T1W MR image without fat-suppression demonstrates a hypointense oval mass (oval) with a hyperintense fatty hilum (arrow).

Click here to view
Figure 7: (b): Intramammary lymph node. The mass demonstrates high signal with T2W (oval)

Click here to view
Figure 7: (c): Intramammary lymph node. Intense enhancement with contrast (oval).

Click here to view


Intraductal papilloma [Figure 8a], [Figure 8b], [Figure 8c] and [Figure 8d] is a benign often periareolar ductal neoplasm that is the most common source of bloody nipple discharge. On ultrasound, dilated ducts are seen around a solid lesion. On MRI, intraductal papilloma appears as a focus or mass of variable enhancement, with a hyperintense duct and hypointense mass on T2W imaging.
Figure 8: (a): Intraductal papilloma. Grayscale

Click here to view
Figure 8: (b): Intraductal papilloma. color Doppler images of the left breast demonstrate anechoic dilated ducts with a hypoechoic mass proximal to the dilatation (arrow, b).

Click here to view
Figure 8: (c): Intraductal papilloma. T2W

Click here to view
Figure 8: (d): Intraductal papilloma. Post-contrast images of the left breast demonstrate hyperintense dilated ducts (c) due to an enhancing periareolar mass (arrow, d).

Click here to view


Common malignant lesions

Malignant breast lesions can also have a variable appearance on MRI. These lesions often show low-signal intensity on T1W imaging, and low or moderate signal intensity on T2W imaging. Malignant lesions enhance with variable enhancement kinetics, as above. They often show restricted diffusion.

Ductal Carcinoma in situ (DCIS) [Figure 9a], [Figure 9b] and [Figure 9c] is a neoplasm of variable grade and may not be visualized on MRI. It may have non-mass-like enhancement that can be clumped, ductal, linear, or segmental in shape. Enhancement kinetics are not useful because this lesion shows slow initial enhancement without washout (Type-I curve).
Figure 9: (a): DCIS. CC view of left breast with microcalcifications (not well projected), soft tissue density, and biopsy clip in the outer aspect (white ovals).

Click here to view
Figure 9: (b): DCIS. MLO views of left breast with microcalcifications (not well projected), soft tissue density, and biopsy clip in the outer aspect (white ovals). Axillary lymphadenopathy (black oval) is noted on the MLO view.

Click here to view
Figure 9: (c): DCIS. Post-contrast MR image of left breast showing clumped non-masslike enhancement in the outer aspect (oval). Note central low-signal artifact from a biopsy tract.

Click here to view


Invasive ductal carcinoma [Figure 10a], [Figure 10b], [Figure 10c], [Figure 10d], [Figure 10e] and [Figure 10f] is the most common primary malignant tumor of the breast. MRI demonstrates an irregularly shaped, spiculated mass, with rim or heterogeneous enhancement. These lesions often display Type-II or Type-III washout curves. However, morphology is always more significant a tool for diagnosis than kinetic curve assessment.
Figure 10: (a): Invasive ductal carcinoma. CC views of the left breast demonstrate an irregular mass with indistinct spiculated margins (white ovals)

Click here to view
Figure 10: (b): Invasive ductal carcinoma. MLO views of the left breast demonstrate an irregular mass with indistinct spiculated margins (white ovals)

Click here to view
Figure 10: (c) Invasive ductal carcinoma. Ultrasound image demonstrates a taller-than-wide hypoechoic irregular mass with indistinct margins.

Click here to view
Figure 10: (d): Invasive ductal carcinoma. Postcontrast MR images demonstrate heterogeneous enhancement of the mass (oval).

Click here to view
Figure 10: (e): Invasive ductal carcinoma. Note the color map overlay

Click here to view
Figure 10: (f): Invasive ductal carcinoma. Type III enhancement curve of the mass.

Click here to view


Invasive lobular carcinoma [Figure 11a], [Figure 11b], [Figure 11c] and [Figure 11d] comprises about 10% of all breast carcinomas. It is very difficult to detect mammographically due to an insidious growth pattern and a density equal or less than that of normal breast tissue. Both mammography and ultrasound often underestimate the lesion size, which has implications for staging and treatment. MRI has a higher sensitivity for lobular carcinoma and can more accurately assess the lesion size. [8] It commonly appears as multicentric/multifocal, spiculated focus or mass with architectural distortion. Enhancement can be asymmetric and nonmasslike in a ductal, segmental, regional, or diffuse pattern.
Figure 11: (a): Invasive lobular carcinoma. CC views of the right breast demonstrate a spiculated focus (ovals).

Click here to view
Figure 11: (b) Invasive lobular carcinoma. MLO views of the right breast demonstrate a spiculated focus (ovals).

Click here to view
Figure 11: (c): Invasive lobular carcinoma. Ultrasound image demonstrates a hypoechoic lesion with echogenic rim.

Click here to view
Figure 11: (d) Invasive lobular carcinoma. Postcontrast MR image demonstrates rim-enhancement of the mass with extension of enhancement within adjacent tissue (oval).

Click here to view


Post-treatment evaluation

MRI can be used to help distinguish scar from tumor recurrence in post-treatment evaluation. A treated tumor generally exhibits decreased enhancement, with false negative rates of 67% and false positive rates up to 56%. [9] Hematoma is hyperintense on T1W imaging, hypointense on T2W imaging, and shows no enhancement. Seroma [Figure 12a], [Figure 12b], [Figure 12c], [Figure 12d] and [Figure 12e] is hypointense on T1W imaging, hyperintense on T2W imaging, and displays smooth peripheral enhancement (< 4 mm thickness) with contrast. A scar generally shows no enhancement, though an early scar may enhance. Enhancement can be seen with recurrence [Figure 13a], [Figure 13b], [Figure 13c] and [Figure 13d], though non-tumor related contrast enhancement can be seen with fibrosis, necrosis, and inflammation.
Figure 12: (a): Posttreatment seroma. CC and views of the right breast from initial screening mammogram demonstrates a mass in the inner aspect (oval, a). This was found to be invasive lobular carcinoma and the patient underwent lumpectomy.

Click here to view
Figure 12: (b): Posttreatment seroma. ML views of the right breast from initial screening mammogram demonstrates a mass in the inner aspect (oval, a). This was found to be invasive lobular carcinoma and the patient underwent lumpectomy.

Click here to view
Figure 12: (c): Posttreatment seroma. This was found to be invasive lobular carcinoma and the patient underwent lumpectomy. MRI exam 6 months after lumpectomy demonstrates a lesion in the surgical bed that is hypointense on T1WI

Click here to view
Figure 12: (d): Posttreatment seroma. This was found to be invasive lobular carcinoma and the patient underwent lumpectomy. MRI exam 6 months after lumpectomy demonstrates a lesion in the surgical bed that is hyperintense on T2WI

Click here to view
Figure 12: (e): Posttreatment seroma. Mild contrast enhancement. This lesion is consistent with a postoperative seroma.

Click here to view
Figure 13: (a): Cancer recurrence. MIP axial images demonstrate an asymmetrically smaller left breast related to lumpectomy for invasive ductal carcinoma. In the deep 12:00 position of the left breast there is an irregular, enhancing mass with spiculations (white oval) consistent with biopsy-proven recurrence of invasive ductal carcinoma.

Click here to view
Figure 13: (b): Cancer recurrence. Sagittal images demonstrate an asymmetrically smaller left breast related to lumpectomy for invasive ductal carcinoma. In the deep 12:00 position of the left breast there is an irregular, enhancing mass with spiculations (white oval) consistent with biopsy-proven recurrence of invasive ductal carcinoma.

Click here to view
Figure 13: (c): Cancer recurrence. Color map overlay axial images demonstrate an asymmetrically smaller left breast related to lumpectomy for invasive ductal carcinoma. In the deep 12:00 position of the left breast there is an irregular, enhancing mass with spiculations (white oval) consistent with biopsy-proven recurrence of invasive ductal carcinoma.

Click here to view
Figure 13: (d): Cancer recurrence. Sagittal MR images demonstrate an asymmetrically smaller left breast related to lumpectomy for invasive ductal carcinoma. In the deep 12:00 position of the left breast there is an irregular, enhancing mass with spiculations (white oval) consistent with biopsy-proven recurrence of invasive ductal carcinoma.

Click here to view


Silicone implant evaluation

MRI can be used to evaluate for rupture of silicone implants. [10] A noncontrast exam with a fluid-sensitive sequence (water-suppressed STIR) is used, as only silicone is hyperintense on this pulse sequence. With extracapsular rupture, silicone can be seen outside the capsule of the implant. MRI is useful to determine the extent of damage of the implant. On ultrasound, there is a "snowstorm" appearance. When intracapsular rupture occurs, silicone is seen external to the implant shell. Silicone that is seen within folds of the implant gives the "keyhole" and "teardrop" sign [Figure 14]. When intracapsular rupture results in a fully collapsed implant, the "linguine" sign can be visible on MRI, analogous to the "stepladder" sign on ultrasound.
Figure 14: Intra- and extracapsular silicone implant rupture. STIR MR image demonstrates hyperintense silicone within the extracapsular soft tissues and within implant shell folds (arrow).

Click here to view



   Conclusions Top


Breast MRI is increasingly being performed. It is important for the general radiologist to be familiar with indications and contraindications, equipment and patient positioning, imaging basics, the ACR BI-RADS® lexicon, common artifacts, common lesions, post-treatment evaluation, and silicone implant evaluation. MRI is a versatile modality for evaluating breast conditions with which general radiologists should be familiar.

 
   References Top

1.Lee CH. Problem solving MR imaging of the breast. Radiol Clin North Am 2004;42:919-34.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
2.American College of Radiology. Breast imaging reporting and data system atlas (BI-RADS atlas). Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2003.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.Erguvan-Dogan B, Whitman GJ, Kushwaha AC, Phelps MJ, Dempsey PJ. BI-RADS-MRI: A primer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:W152-60.  Back to cited text no. 3
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
4.Uematsu T, Kasami M, Watanabe J. Does the degree of background enhancement in breast MRI affect the detection and staging of breast cancer? Eur Radiol 2011 in press.   Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.Kuhl CK, Klaschik S, Mielcarek P, Gieseke J, Wardelmann E, Schild HH. Do T2-weighted pulse sequences help with the differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions in dynamic breast MRI? J Magn Reson Imaging 1999;9:187-96.  Back to cited text no. 5
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
6.Schnall MD, Blume J, Bluemke DA, DeAngelis GA, DeBruhl N, Harms S, et al. Diagnostic architectural and dynamic features at breast MR imaging: Multicenter study. Radiology 2006;238:42-53.  Back to cited text no. 6
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
7.Chen X, Li WL, Zhang YL, Wu Q, Guo YM, Bai ZL. Meta-analysis of quantitative diffusion-weighted MR imaging in the differential diagnosis of breast lesions. BMC Cancer 2010;10:693.  Back to cited text no. 7
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
8.Mann RM, Hoogeveen YL, Blickman JG, Boetes C. MRI compared to conventional diagnostic work-up in the detection and evaluation of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: A review of existing literature. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2008;107:1-14.  Back to cited text no. 8
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
9.Rosen EL, Blackwell KL, Baker JA, Soo MS, Bentley RC, Yu D, et al. Accuracy of MRI in the detection of residual breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181:1275-82.   Back to cited text no. 9
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  
10.Scaranelo AM, Marques AF, Smialowski EB, Lederman HM. Evaluation of the rupture of silicone breast implants by mammography, ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging in asymptomatic patients: Correlation with surgical findings. Sao Paulo Med J 2004;122:41-7.  Back to cited text no. 10
[PUBMED]  [FULLTEXT]  

 
   Authors Top

Gurpreet S. Dhillon


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2a], [Figure 2b], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5a], [Figure 5b], [Figure 5c], [Figure 5d], [Figure 5e], [Figure 6], [Figure 7a], [Figure 7b], [Figure 7c], [Figure 8a], [Figure 8b], [Figure 8c], [Figure 8d], [Figure 9a], [Figure 9b], [Figure 9c], [Figure 10a], [Figure 10b], [Figure 10c], [Figure 10d], [Figure 10e], [Figure 10f], [Figure 11a], [Figure 11b], [Figure 11c], [Figure 11d], [Figure 12a], [Figure 12b], [Figure 12c], [Figure 12d], [Figure 12e], [Figure 13a], [Figure 13b], [Figure 13c], [Figure 13d], [Figure 14]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1]


This article has been cited by
1 3T MRI of the breast with computer aided diagnosis, can it help to avoid unnecessary invasive procedures???
Mahmoud Agha,Ahmed Fathi Eid,Mohamed Nouh
Alexandria Journal of Medicine. 2016; 52(1): 9
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Assessment of grating-based X-ray phase-contrast CT for differentiation of invasive ductal carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ in an experimental ex vivo set-up
Anikó Sztrókay,Julia Herzen,Sigrid D. Auweter,Susanne Liebhardt,Doris Mayr,Marian Willner,Dieter Hahn,Irene Zanette,Timm Weitkamp,Karin Hellerhoff,Franz Pfeiffer,Maximilian F. Reiser,Fabian Bamberg
European Radiology. 2013; 23(2): 381
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
3 Characterization of the enhancing lesions on dynamic contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging in patients with interstitial mammoplasty
Tae Yun Kim,Sung Hun Kim,Bong Joo Kang,Hyeon Sook Kim,Eun Suk Cha,Ji Youn Kim,Byung Joo Song
European Journal of Radiology. 2013; 82(12): 2205
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
4 Aromatase inhibition to decrease background parenchymal enhancement
Julliette M. Buckley,Kevin S. Hughes
Menopause. 2012; 19(4): 385
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
Previous article   Next article
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    Abstract
   Introduction
   Conclusions
    References
    Authors
    Article Figures
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed28840    
    Printed239    
    Emailed18    
    PDF Downloaded3112    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 4    

Recommend this journal